“Big and black??” I’ll say if I’m feeling cheeky. “Oh no.”

The story usually falls apart from there.

This isn’t to say there aren’t imposing and intimidating black men, as there are imposing and intimidating men of every race. Some rappers purposely strike an intimidating pose to show how tough and strong they are. That intimidation, though, also has to do with perception.

In a New York Times piece about white female rappers, Touré writes:

For many Americans, black male rappers are entrancing because they give off a sense of black masculine power — that sense of strength, ego and menace that derives from being part of the street — or because of the seductive display of black male cool.

In that passage, he writes as much about rappers as the public’s view of them: Menacing. Seductive.

Dangerous!

The same is true for the person who tells the story with “the big black guy.” That description often says more about the storyteller than the person in the story.

When talking about your Saturday night or your commute home, there should be a reason to disclose someone’s race. If you ran into a guy who you perceived as big and intimidating, then just say, “There was this big intimidating guy…” There’s nothing wrong with a black man being intimidating, but is it his blackness that makes him intimidating? Openly using “black” as a substitute for “scary” reinforces the stereotypes that blacks are to be feared simply for being black.

If it’s assumed that blacks are to be feared, then every black man and woman is under suspicion for something. It becomes acceptable for blacks to be disproportionately stopped and frisked by police, to be pulled over for Driving While Black and to be followed around a store as if they’re going to steal something.

So unless there’s a particular reason to indicate that the tall, imposing man in your story is an African-American, please don’t mention it.

Just say he’s a big guy.

As I was writing this post, I searched “big black guy” on YouTube. The video below was the first result and the featured selection.

As I said: menacing, seductive.

Dangerous.

See also:
Personal Impact Of The NYPD’s Stop-And-Frisk Policy

Connect with me on Twitter, follow my Tumblr and Like me on Facebook.

Besides the political pressure on Reid to resign, his remarks also prompted talk about a national conversation on race. Professor Michael Eric Dyson said Reid’s remarks were a “teachable moment” for Barack Obama and the president needs to deal with the issue of race. Dyson added that Obama “runs from race like a black man runs from a cop.” That’s not an accurate analogy, nor is it particularly helpful when talking about race, but Obama would be an ideal choice begin a national conversation on race. Dr. Boyce Watkins, though, has a few reasons why Obama shouldn’t begin the conversation. One of which, alienating some white voters, Obama himself probably realizes.

It’s fitting that the issue of race comes up around the time we celebrate the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday while at the same time looking back at Obama’s (historic, though disappointing to some) first year in office. While his ascendancy to the Oval Office is proof that America has come a long way regarding race, the national hissy-fit we just had over Harry Reid ungracefully speaking the truth is proof we have a long way to go. Former Al Gore Campaign Manager Donna Brazile said this about the Reid gaffe: “We don’t have a common language to discuss issues – especially issues like racism and the sensitivity around discussing race. And because of that, people often trip over themselves.”

Finding that common language would help start a national conversation on race. But what exactly is a “national conversation?” If the United States is going to make an effort to talk about race on both national and local levels, how would that actually happen? Logistically speaking, how would a conversation on a national scale work?

 
Is it a series of town hall meetings? Would there be a Facebook page and website? (There actually is a website.) Would it be similar to Live Aid where there are concerts in order to promote the issue and get the conversation going? Is it like a campaign to raise money for cancer or other diseases with ribbons, walks and runs? Would there be corporate sponsors with the mainstream media on-board doing stories and interviews?

Then how should it start? Again, Obama might be a logical choice to initiate it. If he does, he should start and steer the conversation. He shouldn’t wait for “teachable moments.” After the series of talks, meetings or events began, he would jump-in the conversation when appropriate. He wouldn’t be front and center all the time. He would have to let it grow and flow organically.

But if it’s going to be a national conversation on race, it has to reflect the racial diversity and the conversations happening in the country. This “conversation” could have been framed between blacks and whites in the 1970′s and maybe even the 1980′s, but it has to be different now. America’s racial make-up is dramatically changing. Between now and 2050, Latinos are projected to go from a projected 15% to almost 25% of the U.S. population. This conversation couldn’t just be about color (black, white, brown), it would have to be about ethnicity and nationality (Latinos, Asians, Arabs), which would lead to other issues (immigration, jobs, terrorism). It would have to be more than just black and white.

It’s not that having a conversation on race isn’t a good idea. It’s just unclear how this national chat would take place. Maybe “conversation” is the wrong word. Maybe it’s a focus. Maybe it’s a movement. Whatever it is or will be, many of us will have to be brave enough to speak the truth about how we feel, have the strength to listen to others, even when we disagree or it’s uncomfortable, and have the will to honestly look at ourselves for who we are individually and as a nation.

All of those, especially the last one, are difficult for many people to do.

Brace yourself for Question No. 9.

In case you haven’t heard, Question No. 9 on the 2010 U.S. Census, which will begin to be mailed on March 15, asks “What is Person 1′s Race?” One of the choices is “Black, African Am., or Negro.”

Negro?

The antiquated word “Negro” has apparently been on previous census forms. (I can’t remember the census form 10 years ago. Does anyone know if it was on the 2000 form?) Bureau spokesperson Shelly Lowe is quoted in theGrio saying census questions were tested and using Negro “outweighed the potential negatives.” Another Census Bureau spokesperson Jack Martin said in this New York Daily News article, “Many older African-Americans identified themselves that way, and many still do..Those who identify themselves as Negroes need to be included.”

Inclusion is a great sentiment, but Martin may have been overstating how many people prefer to be called Negro. This 1995 study (which was referenced in theGrio piece) found that 3.28% of blacks wanted to be called “Negro.” That seems like a small percentage of people to decide to use such a charged word.

An interesting tidbit from the Daily News piece is that it said the Census form was approved by Congress last year. I find it difficult to believe that the Democratic-controlled Congress, including those in the Congressional Black Caucus, approved “Negro” being on the Census. Either our representatives or their aides didn’t read the census closely enough, or they are way out of touch with a lot of Americans.

I’m not particularly offended that Negro is on the census form. I don’t think the folks at the U.S. Census Bureau are racist. It’s just strange that a Census Bureau official or a congressional staffer didn’t raise a hand and say, “Wait, this isn’t right.” What’s offensive is that the Bureau and Congress are out of touch.

It’s also a reminder of a race of people that don’t have a name. People of African descent who were stolen and enslaved had their cultures stripped away from them. Yes, we’re all American, but most Americans have a qualifier that denotes a place and culture of origin: Irish-American, Chinese-American, Mexican-American. Our locator isn’t a country. It’s a continent with hundreds of cultures. African-American, is one of many terms used to describe people of African descent here in the U.S.: black, Afro-American, Negro, Colored. There’s not even an agreement in the black community on when or how to use nigger or nigga.

African-Americans, blacks, Negroes – people of African descent – have had a long and tragic history in the country. Equality in law is recent relative to the founding of the country. Equality in practice is incomplete. I wonder if this journey (or search?) to name ourselves is an indication of a search for an identity and secure place in America.